What does "good" look like?

Just over a month ago, I reached out to the incredible Kristopher Boulton via his Unstoppable Learning website (links at the end of this blog - I massively recommend you check them out.). I have been following his work since I was fortunate enough to get to hear him speak at the Festival of Education in 2019, on the principles of Direct Instruction. I was on a train, on the way to a job interview, when he replied to me.

I was starstruck in much the way I expect attendees at a Justin Bieber concert are when JB makes eye contact with them. That's how rock 'n' roll I am.

As part of his message, he wrote the following sentence:

"I’d love to understand a bit more about your context, what “good” already looks like, where you are, and where you still see room to grow."

I dropped him a quick placeholder response, thanked him for taking the time to reply to me, and promised I would respond by the weekend to give time to do the question justice. I then went and interviewed, got the train home, and jumped into the examination marking which took up every spare second of the past few months.

The weekend came, and went. I didn't reply.

Now, this wasn't because I didn't have time. It was because, the more I thought about the question, the more I couldn't answer it.

Firstly, I am often my own harshest critic. On more than one occasion a senior teacher, leader or inspector has come to one of my lessons, and rated it as Outstanding/Excellent (England/Wales, if you're wondering). However, when they sit down to give feedback and start with the simple question "So, how do you feel it went?" I will usually launch into a diatribe about how poor I felt it was, and list every little detail I felt hadn't gone well. So, identifying the good doesn't come naturally.

Secondly, how do you identify what you do that is 'good'? Is it about the relationships with the learners? The end results only? The 'Value Added' vs. this-or-that baseline metric (be it FFT, CATs, MIDYIS/YELLIS/ALIS, ALPS, prior years SAS scores from standardised tests - all of these were used in my last institution over the decade I worked there, often multiple of them at once!)? Parental or collegial perception? The classroom environment (physical or otherwise)? How much you 'care' or how many hours you put in? Your willingness to engage with CPD? Some mish-mash of all of this?

At this point, I was in a rabbit-hole. I think I still am. At least, I've started eating a lot of carrots...

It is now more than 5 weeks after the e-mail. Here's my best shot at an answer:

1. My results are generally well above average (though nowhere near the results achieved by proponents of Unstoppable Learning - hence my interest in the programme!). There are areas for development, especially in my teaching of lower-ability classes where I never seem to achieve the results I would like. But, generally, my results indicate I am a 'good' teacher, presuming that a 'satisfactory' one by and large would get results commensurate with the baselines of pupils (and, ignoring all the statistical talk possible in terms of reliability and validity of these baselines for any particular pupil or cohort)... this is both in terms of raw grades and VA against baseline metrics.

2. I tend to form good relationships with learners and parents; in a private school where parents have every right to expect the best for their child AND value for their investment, it is likely an indicator I'm doing something right that I am able to keep pupils on board despite my high demands, and have the broad support of the significant majority of parents/carers I've worked on behalf of? Maybe?... If nothing else I've always thought pupils to be the best barometer as they are the ones actively experiencing your teaching, undoubtedly comparing it with their other subjects and teachers past and present, and they have a wonderful lack of filter at times when providing feedback - if they hold me in high regard I feel it indicates I'm doing something right.

3. After sixteen years as a teacher, I'm still as interested in preparing resources (such as this website) and actively seeking out CPD as ever. I always said in my earlier years (in conversation with a few colleagues who each had 20+ years of experience and had lost interest in both aspects) that the day I no longer felt I could get better (or cared to do so) would be the day I walked out and never returned. I still hold to that. If there is a book or article which may give me a new insight on retrieval practice, spacing and interleaving, assessment and feedback, atomisation and sequencing, cognitive science and its application to teaching, or pretty much anything written by Dylan Wiliam, I want to get my hands on it.

4. Observations by higher-ups and ESTYN/OFSTED. Assuming (boldly) that at least some of those in those positions are more qualified than me to judge good/outstanding, and have judged me as such (at least in those limited snapshots), seems like a valid argument for the claiming of 'good'-ness.

However, I'm not sure that I particularly like any of these reasons in isolation. Perhaps it is the WSOGMM (that's one for any fellow Douglas Adams fans!) that justifies it - I certainly can't come up with any single reason. Or, perhaps I'm not yet even there... but I certainly want to be, aspire to be, and who knows? Maybe it is that determination to always want, need , to do better for my students' sake - maybe that is what actually gets me there?

Kris, I apologise - I don't think I can answer your question on what "good" already looks like... but I think I've answered how I can grow! I will continue to watch with awe your work, assimilate the bits I can understand, and hopefully one day I'll be asking you "So, THIS is why I'm good - now can you help me be better?"

---

You can see Kris's website here: https://unstoppablelearning.co.uk/en-gb/

Or, follow the Substack here: https://unstoppablelearning.substack.com/